About the Author

Charles A. Coulombe is a historian and author who has written widely on Catholic and secular topics, whose 14 books and many articles range from monarchism to mythology to poetry to rum and well beyond. Recently Charles is the author of Blessed Charles of Austria: A Holy Emperor and His Legacy (TAN Books, 2020). Much of Charles Coulombe’s writings can be found though the website of Tumblar House, www.tumblarhouse.com. You can also follow Charles Coulombe’s podcast, Off the Menuon YouTube.

Four Royal Weddings

The glories of our blood and state
     Are shadows, not substantial things;
There is no armour against Fate;
     Death lays his icy hand on kings:
               Sceptre and Crown
               Must tumble down,
And in the dust be equal made
With the poor crooked scythe and spade.
-James Shirley

Never having been married myself, it may seem a bit presumptuous for me to comment upon it – for all that I have been a Best Man twenty-one times.  Nevertheless, I saw my parents’ marriage, and my brother’s (which has given me thus far ten nieces and nephews, and four great nieces and nephews); I know what the Church teaches about marriage as a Sacrament.  History, of course, shows us countless marriages – Catholic and non-Catholic, high and low, poor and wealthy, successful and tragic.  Often, as with the great tragic plays, the lives of the powerful and mighty can shed a great deal of light upon what those of us of lower station should or should not do.

The Sacramental nature of Marriage goes back to the actions of Our Lord Himself; He elevated what had been a natural if still sacred union into a means of Salvation.  This understanding remained with the Orthodox after the 1054 Schism, as with some of the Anglicans – even if most Protestants lost their belief in its Sacramentality.  The binding together of two souls and their creating a new family retained also its natural importance as a foundation of society as a whole.

It is of course no great secret that Marriage is also one of those basic institutions that has ben under ever-increasing attack over the last few centuries – and especially the last few decades: its indissoluble nature, its procreative purpose, its hierarchical nature (husband, wife, and children), and most recently, even its being between one man and one woman are all constantly assaulted.  The recent attempt by a mayor of Brussels to break up a political conference as a “public security measure” because the delegates believe in traditional Marriage is annoying but hardly surprising.

During the same era, another traditional institution that also made up part of the bedrock of Christian society since at least 380 AD has been under steady attack: Monarchy.  By, this of course, I mean the traditional Christian Monarchy which saw participation in Christ’s Kingship as the wellspring of legitimacy.  Since that year, when Emperor Theodosius the Great made Baptism not only entrance into the Church but into Roman Citizenship as well, fine marks denoted Christian Monarchy: 1) Altar: that is, it was the Church that set the rules and tone for Society, and gave legitimacy to governmental authority; 2) Throne: which is to say a Monarch whose authority came from the Faith and national tradition, and whose power – while regulated by those two factors – was sufficient to defend the poor from the wealthy, and vice versa, and to protect the realm; 3) Local Liberties, or what we to-day would call Subsidiarity; 4) Class Cooperation, wherein each part of society was seen as part of a greater whole – or what we could dub Solidarity; and 5) Christendom – the idea that all Christian countries formed part of a greater whole.

As with Marriage, this idea of Monarchy survived in Orthodox countries after 1054, but ironically suffered a strong blow in those countries that succumbed to the Protestant revolt in the 16th century.  If the Altar could be pulled down by the Throne, what could sustain the Throne?  This logic unconsciously led to what was arguably the first modern political revolution, the so-called Wars of the Three Kingdoms in the 17thcentury.  These pitted King Charles I and his Catholic and High Anglican Cavaliers against Oliver Cromwell’s Puritans and his wealthy backers of the newly-made Oligarchy.  The King’s Cause would go down to defeat, and he in turn would be murdered by the victorious revolutionaries after a show trial – a pattern to be repeated after.

Indeed, Charles and his French Queen, Henriette Marie (after whom our State of Maryland was named) was the first of four such Monarchical couples whose reigns (and often lives) were cut short by the revolutionary conflicts that produced the world in which we live to-day.  The others were Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette of France, Nicholas II and Alexandra of Russia, and Blessed Karl I and Servant of God Zita of Austria-Hungary.  Their similarities and differences not only tell us a lot about the classical idea of marriage, they offer useful examples for modern couples.

While all four were devoted to each other, Charles I, Henriette Marie, Louis XVI, and Marie Antoinette had arranged marriages, while the two 20th century couples were love matches.  Charles and Louis quite literally fell in love with their wives after marrying them; what had been a duty became a joy – but it was precisely because all four of them set their minds to do so.

For each couple, religion was a close bond; Charles’ version of Anglicanism was close enough to his wife’s version of Catholicism that they prayed to the Virgin and the Saints together, and he allowed his wife to venerate as martyrs the Catholic Saints executed at Tyburn – and he negotiated for reunion with Rome.  Alexandra was reluctant to marry Tsar Nicholas because she did not want to convert from Lutheranism to Orthodoxy; convinced that it was her duty to do so, she threw herself into its study and became very devout.  Unfortunately this would later allow her to be manipulated by Rasputin, but even that showed the extent of her commitment to her adopted religion.  For Louis and Marie Antoinette, as for Karl and Zita, their shared Catholic Faith gave meaning to their marriage from the beginning – one remembers Karl’s admonition to Zita after their wedding, “now we must help each other get to Heaven.”

Despite the horrible adversities to which each couple and their children were subjected, so long as each of them could they kept up a close family life, centring on the feasts of the Church, joint attendance at Mass or Liturgy, and the usual round of meals, games, and education.  All four couples were open to life – not only because of the need for heirs to continue their respective dynasties, but as part of their mutual love, and their understanding that this is part of Marriage. This they saw to be true, despite what was happening around them. Charles and Henriette would have a total of nine children, four of whom would die young.  But the youngest child, Henrietta, was born in 1644, during the thick of the Civil Wars; she would marry Philippe d’Orleans, the King of France’s nephew, and eventually be the ancestress of both Louis XVI, Blessed Karl, and Zita (Nicholas and Alexandra would both descend from Charles’ sister Elizabeth). Louis and Marie Antoinette would have two miscarriages and four live children; but only the oldest survived her parents. Two died young, and one, of course, was the tragic “Lost Dauphin.” The Royal couple also adopted six children.  Nicholas and Alexandra would have four daughters and a son, while Karl and Zita would have eight children in all, the youngest three born after their deposition, and the last after her father’s death. 

In all four cases, the wives took their role as helpmate and support for their husbands very seriously.  For Marie Antoinette and Alexandra, this meant accompanying their mates (and children, in the latter case) to their deaths.  But for both Henriette Marie and Zita, it meant a long widowhood, spent partly in preparing their children (successfully in the first case, not so, in the second) for restoration, and keeping their husbands’ causes alive.  Partly also, and increasingly, as the years went by, it also meant spending evermore time in prayer and devotions, and in the company of nuns. Henriette Marie was one of the first Royal Propagators of the Sacred Heart devotion, a practice dear to her descendant Zita.  In all four cases, these devoted wives had the same vision of reality as their husbands.  It is noteworthy too that their husbands’ enemies took out their hatred of their menfolk by vicious propaganda against their wives.

For his refusal to agree to the abolition of bishops in the Church of England, as well as his negotiations with Rome, Charles I was judicially murdered by Cromwell and his company; for the first reason, he was canonised by that Church after the Restoration – for the second he is considered by some Catholics to be a sort of proto-martyr of the Ordinariates. His death day, January 30, is kept as a feast by many Anglicans and others. Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette were considered martyrs by Pius VI; doubtless, had subsequent French governments not been so dependent on the French Revolution for their legitimacy, their causes would have been introduced.  Nevertheless, on their respective death days, requiems are held for them across France, after which, in the case of Louis, his very pious will and his consecration of his Kingdom to the Sacred Heart are read.  Nicholas and Alexandra and their children have been canonised by the Orthodox Churches. As can be seen by their titles, Blessed Karl and Sevant of God Zita are en route to canonisation; Karl’s feast day is not the anniversary of his death, April 1, but of their wedding, October 21, which shall doubtless become their joint feast if, as, and when she is beatified.

So what can we gather for ourselves out of all of this ancient history?  The first is that, regardless of how much Romantic love may be present at the time of the wedding, it can and must be reinforced by the determination of both spouses to do so.  It is not simply a question of emotion, but of will.  When a couple marry, they must resolve to want the best for each other, “to help each other get to Heaven.”  This resolve will help them overcome the myriad annoyances and difficulties that beset every marriage – or any human relationship, to be honest.

As with the couples we have looked at, religion must be the binding force.  Husband and wife both need to see their marriage as a Sacrament, as sacred and holy in its way as Baptism or the Holy Eucharist – and they should not be afraid to call the other Sacraments to the aid of this one.  Frequent confession and shared adoration can be a very strong help in marriage, alongside attending Mass, saying the Rosary together, and a multitude of other devotions. Truly, the transformation of the home into a “domestic church” is exceedingly important.

Being open to children is a key part of that domestic church – even if economics or other issues seem grim.  As we saw with our Royals, regardless of triumph or catastrophe, they kept up as normal a life as they could, and that included begetting and taking care of children, despite the inconveniences.  If one is unlikely to be defeated in battle or beheaded, one has far less to worry about than they did.  As with them, Mass and devotions, the feasts of the Church Year, dinner time, shared recreation, and home schooling if required can all be part of building up a strong family unit – which in its time will beget others.

Unlike politicians, who think no further ahead than the next election (or often enough, the next press conference), Monarchs, like parents, have to think in the long term.  As the Sovereign pairs needed to have a common vision of where they wanted to go as a family, so too must every couple.  Rooted in their Faith and their vocation, this vision must be strong enough to sustain them in good times and bad; when children do well or badly, or God forbid, die before their time; and when at last one of the spouses dies, and the other called by God either to follow them soon, or wait out a long widowhood.  If it is a Catholic – that is to say, true – vision, it will be in opposition to what many of their friends and relations are doing or say they should do.  But they may be inspired by the four marriages we have looked at, and the Holy Family of Bethlehem to which all four looked as guides.


Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *